Whats your height/weight? I'm looking at a pair of 173 Hyper V6 for sale locally, they look like an excellent ski but worried they might ski too short with all the rocker
Printable View
Whats your height/weight? I'm looking at a pair of 173 Hyper V6 for sale locally, they look like an excellent ski but worried they might ski too short with all the rocker
Some decent deals on Dynafit (20% off), Movement (40%), and Hagan (40%) skis on S&C right now - https://www.steepandcheap.com/alpine-touring-skis:
Hagan
Core 84 - $450
Ultra 87 - $470
Boost 99 - $510
Movement
Race Pro 77 - $550
Session 95 - $550
Dynafit
Blacklight 95 - $600
Blacklight Pro - $640
Blacklight 80 - $520
Blacklight 88 - $560
Mezzalama race ski - $520
Also Voile WSP for 490 and Scott Superguide and BD Helios.
Context: Benneke10 is like 6'5" and an aspiring snowbladerQuote:
Originally Posted by Benneke10
Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk
6'1.5"Quote:
Originally Posted by tgapp
Re: Hyper V6 Length... I'm 5' 10" 170 lb . I feel like 173 is verging on too short. I'd like to try 178s, but if I was buying another pair I'd probably stick with 173.
Another boot question : can anyone comment on the downhill ski performance of the F1 LT vs the Scorpius?
i can’t seem to find a Scorpius locally but have a place I can go try on the F1. I’m wondering if the 200 extra grams for the Scorpius buys you any extra downhill performance. From everything I’ve heard / read the Scorpius will likely fit me great but I want to find a way of rationalizing the extra weight.
I recently bought the F1 LT and Skorpius, but haven't skied the Skorp yet. The Skorp definitely feels stiffer and more supportive but the F1 LT is also really really good for its weight. Lots of reviews on the Skimo co site indicate the Skorp is notably more powerful, and I will chime in again once I use them. There are several online shops with good return policies that have the Skorpius in stock, or if you don't want to drop big $ try the Solar which is the same fit. I tried the Solar on at backcountry before I ordered when the Skorp was sold out everywhere, its a notably lower instep and wider forefoot than the F1 LT.
+1 I haven't skied the F1LT but I do have 5 days on Skorps and I would say that they are noticeably more powerful than standard F1s (which most folks consider to be stiffer than the F1LT). Very different fit though, which IMO should be the deciding factor here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Benneke10
The F1 LT is probably somewhere in between the fit of the Skorpius and standard F1 in terms of total volume, and with the F1 LT having a narrower forefoot than both. I have a narrow, low volume foot with a low-ish instep and I fit well in both the Skorp and F1 LT, which is kind of wild since until those 2 boots came out I didn't fit well in any lightweight touring boots
Has anyone skied any of the Hagan Ultra skis? Any good? Thinking about a pair of the 87s.
Since my earlier rant about how I no longer have much use for skinny skis I've taken a good look at the lack of snow in CO and the lack of snow in the long term forecast. It's looking like covering a whole bunch of ground on dirt, snow and rock might be the best way to entertain myself in the mountains for the next while.
I had the Ultra 82s last year in 170. I am somewhat new to skiing and they were my first skinny ski, and they were very wrong for me. Super stiff, cambered, and very rearward mount made them a handful in tight places. They were damp for their weight and could charge groomers, but that was the only thing my mediocre skills could get them to do. You are more familiar with this kind of ski than I am, but even for a skinny ski they have a long running length and I would have had a lot more fun on the 163. I could not bend the shovels at all on mine.
Thanks for that. Sound like it's not quite what I'm after.Quote:
Originally Posted by Benneke10
I don't need the lightest ski. Want something 90mm or less. About 175 in length. Prefer something damper, not too turny, but not too locked in. Haven't been paying attention to this category recently. Cheap would be good too. Anybody selling?
I have the perfect ski for you: Dynafit Speed 76 in a 176 length. This ski seems purpose built for resort skinning and other hard snow applications.Quote:
Originally Posted by I've seen black diamonds!
I reviewed it here: https://skimo.co/dynafit-speed-76-ski
Selling with Ski Trab mohair skins for 305: https://imgur.com/a/PeP14OO
Edit: looking back, I think I undersold how damp they feel. They were very damp for the weight imo.
Thanks! Skorpius sounds like the best boot for me. I want a bit more power and I have a super low instep.
I have a scarpa discount… so I’m going to slip those on first and see what I think.
Once you get some days on them post with some updates on how they ski and what type of ski you can drive with them. I’m wondering if a 1600 gram ski would be more than the boot is happy with.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benneke10
I have 3 days with Skorps on Down CD104L (a 1525g ski). They might be a touch underpowered for that ski but not by much.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tailwind
Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk
I skied the skorpius with a line vision 98 186 and a black Crows atris 189 last year. They seemed to pair very well with the lines. They were fine with the atris in good snow, but it was easy to blow through the flex in bad snow.
I ended up snapping the tongue and skiing Fischer travers carbons for the second half the season while the skorps got warrantied. Now, having skied both back to back, the skorps are way more powerful.
That’s a helpful comparison. The ‘functional’ but not exciting ski I’m looking at is the MTN 95 which is likely okay as it’s only a little heavier but is slightly narrower. I’m tempted by the Woodsman 102 tour and based on this I would imagine the 182cm would be pushing it (1600 grams) and the 187 (1700 grams and longer) is likely a no go.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgapp
I might be able to get you a discount on Skorps if you want, send me a messageQuote:
Originally Posted by Tailwind
How's the range of motion compared to the Travers? I'd imagine with the plastic tongue it would have alot more resistance than the Travers or F1LT.Quote:
Originally Posted by NWFlow
Again, no point of reference against those boots, but I would say that the Skorps walk 90-95%% as well as boots like Sytrons, Alien RS, etc (much better than standard F1's).Quote:
Originally Posted by gustav
Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk
1000g boot driving a 2200g ski. Props my man!Quote:
Originally Posted by NWFlow
MTN has nothing but good reviews from blister. And people I know who’ve skied really like it also.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tailwind
I love Blister but I wouldn’t consider them to be an authority on lightweight touring skis. I’m sure the MTN is good but there are probably 10 other skis in the same weight class that are at least as good
Attachment 395085Attachment 395086Attachment 395087Attachment 395088Attachment 395089
I own the Quantum Asolo 27.5, F1 LT 28, and Skorpius 27.5 right now, I thought some of you might appreciate a comparison. The Quantum and Skorpius have stock footbeds, and the Skorpius also has tags on but they probably weigh less than 5g. The F1 LT has the buckle mod and Superfeet blue footbeds, if I remember correctly it weighed around 1120g stock.
Cuff height is standard for a 1kg boot on the Quantum, and the F1 LT and Skorp are much higher than anything else in the category. The F1 LT cuff is slightly higher in the back, and the Skorp is slightly higher in the front. I'm trying to justify a reason to keep the F1 LT and the Skorp and will probably sell the Quantum which has the best walk mode by far, easiest transitions, and fits amazing in the midfoot and forefoot, I appreciate the higher cuffs and stiffness of the other 2 boots. The Quantum walks like a true race boot though, best in class. Maybe I should sell all 3 and get Pierre Gignoux Mountain boots, but haven't had a chance to try them on yet.
To be fair, I'm guessing that's why they broke...Quote:
Originally Posted by alpinevibes
Yeah, I'd say the ROM is appreciably diminished compared to the traverse. They are still a light, easily walkable boot, but there is a noticeable difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by gustav
Overall, I struggled to get the Skorpius to be comfy and fit my foot, the Travers more or less fit out of the box. Guess i've gotten old, but at this point I'll take the comfort and walkability of the Travers and accept the decrease in skiability.
On that note, anyone here have any time on the new Fischer Transalp?